Spending

Almost all interest groups and federal agencies greatly exaggerate the problems with which they are dealing so they can get more money and power. Moderate commentator Michael Barone pointed this out in regard to energy:

“Lobbyists and litigators for environmental restriction groups have produced energy policies that I suspect future generations will regard as lunatic. We haven’t built a new nuclear plant for 30 years, since a Jane Fonda movie exaggerated their dangers. We have allowed states to ban oil drilling on the Outer Continental Shelf, prompted by a failure of 40 or 50-year-old technology in Santa Barbara, California in 1969 - though current technology is much better as shown by a lack of oil spills in waters off Louisiana and Mississippi during Hurricane Katrina. We have banned oil drilling on a very small portion of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge that is godforsaken tundra for fear of disturbing a heard of caribou - a species of hoofed animals in no way endangered or scarce. The ANWR ban is the work of environmental restriction groups that depend on direct-mail fundraising to pay their bills and keep their jobs. That means they must always say the sky is falling….ANWR is a precious cause for them because it can be portrayed dishonestly as a national treasure….”

The federal government always seems to overreact to any well-publicized problem. The Air Marshal program is a prime example. Before 9/11, this was a force with 33 agents. Now, it has over 4,000. USA Today reported that its last-known budget was $786 million, but it is probably much higher. Some of its information is classified but really should not be. According to reporter Michael Grabell, 18 air marshals have been charged with felonies, and many more have been arrested for other minor crimes. One marshal killed a man who he mistakenly thought was a terrorist. This is a useless, totally needless agency. It is a complete waste of taxpayer money. Yet once a federal agency is created, it is almost impossible even to decrease funding, much less to do away with it altogether.

One former member of Congress said we really did all we needed to do on aviation security when we secured the cockpit doors. This one inexpensive move took away the ability to use planes as they were used on 9/11.